(LifeSiteNews) — A recent study in The Journal of Medical Ethics, an affiliate of the British Medical Journal, shows that getting a COVID-19 “booster shot” is at least 18 times more dangerous for young people than getting COVID-19.
According to the study’s authors, “[t]o prevent one COVID-19 hospitalisation over a six-month period, we estimate that 31,207–42,836 young adults aged 18–29 years must receive a third mRNA vaccine.”
“Booster mandates in young adults are expected to cause a net harm: per COVID-19 hospitalisation prevented, we anticipate at least 18.5 serious adverse events from mRNA vaccines, including 1.5-4.6 booster-associated myopericarditis cases in males (typically requiring hospitalisation).”
READ: Sweden advises against Novavax’s COVID shot for young people after cardiac concerns
The authors addressed the issue of “COVID-19 vaccine booster mandates” at North American universities and concluded that, based on the safety data for COVID-19 booster shots, “[u]niversity booster mandates are unethical because they:”
- are not based on an updated (Omicron era) stratified risk-benefit assessment for this age group;
- may result in a net harm to healthy young adults;
- are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission;
- violate the reciprocity principle because serious vaccine-related harms are not reliably compensated due to gaps in vaccine injury schemes; and
- may result in wider social harms. We consider counterarguments including efforts to increase safety on campus but find these are fraught with limitations and little scientific support.
The authors used the official data on vaccine safety and effectiveness provided by the CDC and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to create estimates for their risk-benefit analysis.
READ: Major autopsy report finds COVID jabs responsible for sudden cardiovascular deaths
In conclusion, the study authors wrote that “[w]hen vaccine mandates are unethical, individuals may have an ethical duty to oppose them, in part to tolerance and prevent further bureaucratic encroachment and disenfranchisement of individuals with reasoned arguments against such mandates.”
Moreover, the authors were critical of vaccine mandates being implemented “despite controversy among experts” and “without updating the sole publicly available risk-benefit analysis19 to the current Omicron variants nor submitting the methods to public scrutiny.”
“Policymakers should repeal COVID-19 vaccine mandates for young adults immediately and ensure pathways to compensation to those who have suffered negative consequences from these policies,” the scientist demanded.